P!N20 wrote:Or it just leaves the chain on the inner ring and you keep happily riding along. Catastrophic.

Probably the most ludicrous one listed there! Plenty of them do stretch the bounds of credibility but are theoretically possible.

Most drive train slips and jams don't throw you magically off your bike. Though if you are throwing your bike around it can increase the likelihood.

Proper drivechain jams are really only likely if you end up with your chain caught between the rear cassette and the wheel. Which could be quite ugly at high speed but when I've experience it I've never come off. Personally I've lost count of the tens of thousands of drive train slips both due to rough conditions or a less than perfect drive chain. (These sorts of things are normal on any well used kids bike or an old clunker city bike.)

I've been doing bicycle 'maintenance' since before I was 10. I won't claim I always knew what I was doing. I certainly didn't know what torque was let alone a torque wrench. It is odd that none of those catastrophic events occurred.

CKinnard wrote:if you value your life and limb, respect what bolts do, and learn how to torque to spec, and use either grease or loctite as appropriate.

Let's not be overdramatic here.

Lets for a second speculate on how many bikes have been built and are still being built without a way of measuring torque. Both for past and present I would say it is the majority.

It is a wonder our roads aren't littered with fatalities from imprecise torquing.

how do you teach someone to tighten a bolt appropriately?

Once cyclists don't cycle anymore, due to being dead, disabled, or not wanting to be severely injured again, their cycling mates tend to forget about them real quick.....cyclists are very efficient at underestimating risk of crashing.

regarding all the bikes ever built, how many of them are ridden more than 100km a week?

Once cyclists don't cycle anymore, due to being dead, disabled, or not wanting to be severely injured again...

<sarcasm>Clearly, we need mandatory torque wrench laws. And licensing boards in each state to ensure user competence. And ban flat pack furniture while we're at it.

Won't someone think of the children!</sarcasm>

For 99.99% percent of real world cases "pretty tight" is good enough. As I mentioned before, that is the requirement for structures under the relevant AS/NZ standards. Not a single torque wrench required.

The books are already full enough of laws and regulation to discourage cycling and walking.

And in every market space I look at bureaucratic gnomes are adding regulations to solve problems that, statistically, don't exist. But they do "close the shop" just that little bit more.

Thoglette wrote:<sarcasm>Clearly, we need mandatory torque wrench laws. And licensing boards in each state to ensure user competence. And ban flat pack furniture while we're at it.

Won't someone think of the children!</sarcasm>

For 99.99% percent of real world cases "pretty tight" is good enough. As I mentioned before, that is the requirement for structures under the relevant AS/NZ standards. Not a single torque wrench required.

The books are already full enough of laws and regulation to discourage cycling and walking.

And in every market space I look at bureaucratic gnomes are adding regulations to solve problems that, statistically, don't exist. But they do "close the shop" just that little bit more.

excessive government is the result of people preferring to remain ignorant of how the world they live in works.If you live long enough, self sufficiency trumps dependence on gubmint.

I profit when people hurt themselves, so am a better judge of the personal cost of trauma than most, and make the recommendation not to remain ignorant of how to keep a bicycle safe on that basis. If one intends to ride regularly for most of their life, a few hours away from the tele or computer games to learn appropriate torquing of bolts will have higher returns. Always amazes me that some have such busy lives they cannot take an educated interest in....much.

human909 wrote:I've been doing bicycle 'maintenance' since before I was 10. I won't claim I always knew what I was doing. I certainly didn't know what torque was let alone a torque wrench. It is odd that none of those catastrophic events occurred.

and spoke tension meters are for mugs.

stunning that the lackadaisical don't know one person who died or is disabled after mechanical failure. you guys need to adventure out of your safe spaces.

Thoglette wrote:Traditional materials; engineering and tool design meant that a reasonably calibrated wrist would get it close enough 90% of the time.

Perhaps, but that degree of feel takes years of experience to acquire. Few amateur bike mechanics would have it, or be likely to develop it. Typical fasteners used on bicycles tend to be of small diameter and low tensile strength, thus are easily damaged. For amateurs the smart thing to do is to use a torque wrench.

I would include most so-called "professional" bike mechanics in that lot. Bloody useless. They overtighten everything to billy-o. Pedals especially. Don't get me started.

CKinnard wrote:I profit when people hurt themselves, so am a better judge of the personal cost of trauma than most, and make the recommendation not to remain ignorant of how to keep a bicycle safe on that basis.

Are you really? That is a bold claim but hardly relevant. But Australian cyclists are used "people who profit when people hurt themselves" believing they know best for cyclists. Such patronising attitudes have damaged cycling enough.

CKinnard wrote:If one intends to ride regularly for most of their life, a few hours away from the tele or computer games to learn appropriate torquing of bolts will have higher returns. Always amazes me that some have such busy lives they cannot take an educated interest in....much.

How have you come to that conclusion. Seriously how? Why do you think using a torque wrench for a bicycle bolts is so vital?

CKinnard wrote:go and experiment with it 100 times, and tell us how many times the chain doesn't jam, if you live that long.

Why would it jam on a correctly set up derailleur? Also what is the big deal if it jams?

P!N20 wrote:I must be missing something. Can you please explain how my freewheel has suddenly stopped working due to my chain getting jammed due to my front derailleur pinch bolt coming loose?

I wouldn't go that far. But my wheel that I built is still true as the day it was built. No fancy spoke tension meter involved.

CKinnard wrote:stunning that the lackadaisical don't know one person who died or is disabled after mechanical failure.

Is it really that stunning? Or simply EXTRAORDINARILY rare.

I put it to you that you are being obsessively pedantic about this. As somebody who has ridden and maintained bikes in this 'lackadaisical' manner for decades it is shocking that I haven't been killed a dozen times. Sure I've had plenty of mechanical and drive train failures over the years but they don't result in instant injury or death like you continue to allude to.

CKinnard wrote:you guys need to adventure out of your safe spaces.

Huh!.... Given what I choose to do for recreation in my spare time I find this comment of yours hilarious.

human909 wrote:I put it to you that you are being obsessively pedantic about this. As somebody who has ridden and maintained bikes in this 'lackadaisical' manner for decades it is shocking that I haven't been killed a dozen times. Sure I've had plenty of mechanical and drive train failures over the years but they don't result in instant injury or death like you continue to allude to.

Not to mention mechanical failure still being a possibility even with every bolt precisely torqued.

CKinnard wrote:simply simple! the land of personal anecdote trumping everything.

Yep. I've been guilty in this thread of that. But so have you..... Like I've said the vast majority of bikes aren't constructed with precisely measure torquing of bolts. I have noticed you have yet to accept this.

On the more analytical side of things you have consistently failed to respond when your doubtful claims have been challenged.

CKinnard wrote:

P!N20 wrote:Not to mention mechanical failure still being a possibility even with every bolt precisely torqued.

so in your safe space, all possibilities are equal.

You seem to be trying to reduce discussion into a circular black hole. One might conjecture that you cannot engage in debate in a rational way so you resort to strawman tactics.....

CKinnard wrote:simply simple! the land of personal anecdote trumping everything.

Yep. I've been guilty in this thread of that. But so have you..... Like I've said the vast majority of bikes aren't constructed with precisely measure torquing of bolts. I have noticed you have yet to accept this.

On the more analytical side of things you have consistently failed to respond when your doubtful claims have been challenged.

CKinnard wrote:

P!N20 wrote:Not to mention mechanical failure still being a possibility even with every bolt precisely torqued.

so in your safe space, all possibilities are equal.

You seem to be trying to reduce discussion into a circular black hole. One might conjecture that you cannot engage in debate in a rational way so you resort to strawman tactics.....

My personal experience includes a professional interest in the personal interest of many others - via hospital A&E, ICU, orthopedics wards, outpatients, and being a safety consultant and medical aid on many large charity rides. If you want to open your eyes about mechanical failures, cruise a big charity ride (or large road race) in a sag wagon or mobile mechanic vehicle.

How many nursing homes residents does your personal experience include? Do you want to hear about the ex-cyclists confined to wheel chairs or having permanent brain injuries I've worked with? Funnily enough the cycling industry and media, like most cyclists, turn a blind eye to this side of the cycling experience. Even if one cycling media story in ten million covered disabling injuries, the 'cycling industry' would be ranting too much attention is being given to low probability events, and unnecessarily scaring people from riding.

As I said earlier, cyclists are brilliant at being insouciant PollyAnna's riding around without a care in the world, full of adrenalin, enkephalin, and endorphins, thinking they've got one up on the rest of life, b#lls overriding brains, thumping chests hollering crashin's part of racin, ..... full of the confidence that comes with ignorance....until they break bones and can't ride for months or ever. Then, it is back to Mum's.

As for what the industry convention might be for torquing to spec for 'most bikes', I've seen enough new and serviced bikes with inappropriately torqued bolts, to believe anyone who outsources to sub $20/hour labour, puts a similar value on their life and limb. If you think torquing to spec can be universally pilloried, you haven't watched enough criterium sprints - loose pedals, cleats, bars, stems, failed bars, stems, wheels.... One of the reasons I stopped racing is because of pervasive racer ignorance about keeping their bikes in safe working order.

Physics is physics. Every bolt is designed with an optimal torque range, that optimally resists vibration and the torque of moving components they secure (pedals, cranks, cassettes). The cycling industry is a an 'industry' that is want to push the limits of doing as little as possible, including ignoring physics, in order to make an easier quicker carefree buck. Most bikes don't do more than 50km a week. If you want to ride 200km/week much at speed, on a bike maintained for 50km/wk, Darwin understands.

As I've said, it takes a few hours to read up, understand, and put into practice, torquing to spec. Young people generally are mechanically illiterate these days. Why encourage that? The lessons learned with bicycle maintenance are a foundation for competence with all things mechanical. The goal of life shouldn't be to get through it with the least self sufficiency and comprehension of machinery and equipment one critically relies on. Young males in particular overwhelmingly get enormous self confidence and security from mechanical aptitude. Manual know how should be encouraged over the alternative - a few hundred extra hours computer gaming and social media.

Probability should also be better understood by the risk-o-philes. In my game there's about a 1 in 100,000 chance of severely debilitating or fatal trauma with an upper cervical rotational manipulation (of the neck). An x-ray can reduce that probability substantially. By some of the comments here, some think taking that x-ray is for meowing cats.

CKinnard wrote:My personal experience includes a professional interest in the personal interest of many others - via hospital A&E, ICU, orthopedics wards, outpatients, and being a safety consultant and medical aid on many large charity rides.

Which seems to have heavily biased you views. This discussion has been had before and is a big reason why so much medical 'research' in Australia consistently insists helmets are so necessary for cycling that they should be made compulsary.

CKinnard wrote:As I said earlier, cyclists are brilliant at being insouciant PollyAnna's riding around without a care in the world, full of adrenalin, enkephalin, and endorphins, thinking they've got one up on the rest of life, b#lls overriding brains, thumping chests hollering crashin's part of racin, .....

What makes you think any of that is relevant to this discussion? Unless you are implying that is influencing people in this threads view simply because they are cyclists. Funny how you seem to be proclaiming a monopoly on knowledge and perspective and dismissing pretty much everybody else's views because they are cyclists.

Even more odd that you still have yet to respond to ACTUAL queries regarding your claimed consequences. (Aka the loosening of the front derailuer cable!)

CKinnard wrote:Funnily enough the cycling industry and media, like most cyclists, turn a blind eye to this side of the cycling experience.

Again you are having a rant at cycling media and the industry rather than addressing the actual point. Like I said earlier my main recreation very much is NOT in the 'safe space' as you call it. Most accidents are looked and discussed intently.

CKinnard wrote: If you think torquing to spec can be universally pilloried

I haven't pilloried torquing to spec at all. I've merely pilloried your wowser mentality that suggested that not using a torque wrench is dangerous.

CKinnard wrote:you haven't watched enough criterium sprints

Hang on. Why are we talking about RACING? Competitive racing is a whole lot different from general cycling. I would be using my old pub bike for racing.

CKinnard wrote:Physics is physics. Every bolt is designed with an optimal torque range, that optimally resists vibration and the torque of moving components they secure (pedals, cranks, cassettes).

Yep I'm in that industry that bolts stuff together. Big big heavy stuff. Heavy machinery that vibrates. Like I said earlier torque wrenches are not common. Even our structural code allows for non measured torquing.

CKinnard wrote:If you want to ride 200km/week much at speed, on a bike maintained for 50km/wk, Darwin understands.

Again that wowserism..... I know people who ride 1000km a week after and their responses regarding torque wrenches would be the same.

CKinnard wrote:Probability should also be better understood by the risk-o-philes.

It would seem that you have been having difficulty understanding this. How many bikes are there Amsterdam, Holland, the world? How many do you think have seen a torque wrench in their construction and maintenance?

This flood of deaths and injuries expected from poorly torqued components must be hidden from us in a deep state conspiracy!

My carbon-fibre-free steel touring bike has never had a torque wrench across it. Nothing's ever rattled loose.My carbon bikes have all been assembled and maintained with the aid of a torque wrench wherever there is a carbon part, but not on metal to metal situations such as pedals to cranks.My concern is not that something may vibrate loose, parts don't if properly tightened, with or without a torque wrench. My overriding concern is avoiding damage to brittle and expensive carbon bits and pieces.In 52 years of cycling I've only ever lost a tail light and a downtube shifter assembly bolt. Neither presented a life-threatening circumstance.Much more importan than correct torque is my regular check for tightness/looseness. This doesn't mean I further tighten a nut, bolt or screw on each check, just a quick check with an allen key or spanner that nothing is loose. Critical fixtures such as stem and handlebars receive maybe a monthly check.Worth noting too that torque values are determined on dry (no lube) and clean threads. A greased bolt or screw can be easily over torqued. Likewise a dirty or rusty thread can be under tightened.Medium grip Locktite adds a level of security and peace of mind.

Tim wrote:In 52 years of cycling I've only ever lost a tail light and a downtube shifter assembly bolt. Neither presented a life-threatening circumstance.Much more importan than correct torque is my regular check for tightness/looseness. This doesn't mean I further tighten a nut, bolt or screw on each check, just a quick check with an allen key or spanner that nothing is loose. Critical fixtures such as stem and handlebars receive maybe a monthly check.

100% on the money. Torque wrench has never seen any of my bikes, race, MTB, cx, and never had an issue due to loose or broken parts, but i always do a spanner check prior to a race or at any regular maintenance. Race car only sees a torque wrench at an engine build and wheel nut check, other than that its just good regular maintenance and spanner checks prior to events. Again never had a DNF due to parts falling off. Not knocking the use of a torque wrench, but just because you don't use or need one doesn't make you some backyard scrapheaper on a death wish

Tim wrote:My carbon-fibre-free steel touring bike has never had a torque wrench across it. Nothing's ever rattled loose.My carbon bikes have all been assembled and maintained with the aid of a torque wrench wherever there is a carbon part, but not on metal to metal situations such as pedals to cranks.My concern is not that something may vibrate loose, parts don't if properly tightened, with or without a torque wrench. My overriding concern is avoiding damage to brittle and expensive carbon bits and pieces.In 52 years of cycling I've only ever lost a tail light and a downtube shifter assembly bolt. Neither presented a life-threatening circumstance.Much more importan than correct torque is my regular check for tightness/looseness. This doesn't mean I further tighten a nut, bolt or screw on each check, just a quick check with an allen key or spanner that nothing is loose. Critical fixtures such as stem and handlebars receive maybe a monthly check.Worth noting too that torque values are determined on dry (no lube) and clean threads. A greased bolt or screw can be easily over torqued. Likewise a dirty or rusty thread can be under tightened.Medium grip Locktite adds a level of security and peace of mind.

+1I'm, with Tim and Thoglette and others on this. In 41 years of riding plus building and flipping bikes to finance my own bike/s, I have never, ever gone near a steel bike with a torque wrench, and have never had a sudden or catastrophic failure of any component and have also never crashed because of a component-related issue. Any crashes I've had have been caused or contributed to, by cars being oblivious to me and my space (roundabouts are the worst). And I've only had one issue with a flipped bike, not torque-wrench related (double punctures experienced by buyer on first day of ownership, thanks Continental).

I would argue that anyone with any degree of mechanical sympathy (i.e. pretty much everyone on this forum, or at least in this thread) will hear the sound, or feel the vibration, of a component being out of alignment or loose long before an event occurs.

Couple things though (Tim reminded me of this). A cheap crappy torque wrench, or one that hasn't been checked/re-calibrated, can be worse than no torque wrench. If the wrench is measuring even just -2Nm (for example) the potential for crushing fittings or stripping threads is higher. And Loctite blue, or something similar, should always be used on vital safety-related fittings like caliper mounts, rotor bolts.

Tim wrote:Worth noting too that torque values are determined on dry (no lube) and clean threads. A greased bolt or screw can be easily over torqued. Likewise a dirty or rusty thread can be under tightened.Medium grip Locktite adds a level of security and peace of mind.

Can you provide an authoritative reference supporting that torque values are for ungreased threads.

CKinnard wrote:My personal experience includes a professional interest in the personal interest of many others - via hospital A&E, ICU, orthopedics wards, outpatients, and being a safety consultant and medical aid on many large charity rides.

Which seems to have heavily biased you views. This discussion has been had before and is a big reason why so much medical 'research' in Australia consistently insists helmets are so necessary for cycling that they should be made compulsary.

so what you are saying is.....

most who drink and drive don't have car accidents. most who smoke heavily don't get lung cancer. most who eat fast food heavily don't get a heart attack.

CKinnard wrote:Can you provide an authoritative reference supporting that torque values are for ungreased threads.

A quick search reveals mixed information. The only authoritative reference is the manufacturer that provides the torque values for a specific bolt for a specific component. Some manufacturers don't provide guidance at all which makes torque figures much less precise.

CKinnard wrote:so what you are saying is.....

most who drink and drive don't have car accidents. most who smoke heavily don't get lung cancer. most who eat fast food heavily don't get a heart attack.

And what you are saying is that you should never step outside because people who step outside are more likely to get struck by lightning.

From my and others perspectives it does seem like you are worried about extremely unlikely events of catastrophic injuries caused by not using a torque wrench.

I also again note you have yet to reply to the repeated questioning of some of your more outlandish claims. EG a loose bolt on your front derailleur.

P!N20 wrote:

CKinnard wrote:- chain can jam and throw you off the bike when the front derailleur cable slips through its securing bolt.

Or it just leaves the chain on the inner ring and you keep happily riding along. Catastrophic.

Last edited by human909 on Sat May 19, 2018 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.